Sunday, March 20, 2005

Schiavo and Peterson II

In reaction to the Schiavo-Peterson parallels, Galley Friend J.E. asks, "If Terri Schiavo were a condemned prisoner, the would the state be legally allowed to execute her in this condition?" Good question. My guess is, no.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Perfect! I'll be using that arguement every chance I get.

Jimmy Pissed said...

Yeah, actually in Florida and Texas you can execute damn near anybody as long as they are over 18 and have a pulse.

Here's hoping Hurricane season 2005 wipes that god-forsaken phallic symbol called Florida right off the map.

Jay D. Homnick said...

Hey, Jim, as long as I'm here, there's still hope to save the State.

And there are some really great people here, not least the owners of the hospice where Terri lives, who have not gotten (according to last week's Miami Herald) one red cent from Schiavo for housing the wife whose "peace" is his animating passion.

Anonymous said...

Terribly bad analogy.

The court found that Ms. Schiavo would not want to be kept alive in this state. If she had a living will, we wouldn't be discussing this issue. But because she didn't, the Florida courts had to make a finding as to her wishes.

If you think that the courts got this wrong, well fine. The courts get things wrong all the time. But then who are we going to say gets to determine Ms. Schiavo's wishes? Congress? A bunch of bloggers sitting on their rear-ends? Frankly, I’m more confident that the courts who have examined mountains of evidence introduced by all the parties in this case and who applied a very stringent standard to determine her wishes have come to the right conclusion about what Ms. Schiavo would want.

If you want to argue that people shouldn’t be able to refuse medical treatment OR food and water, fine; then pass a law, and let’s not allow ANYBODY to refuse food and water. But let’s stop mischaracterizing the issues.